Post navigation

Window-Dressing

Your visit to the Twin Cities yesterday, the media assures us, was not just because it was yet another city that is utterly safe territory for you. It’s because, supposedly, Minneapolis is a leader in “curbing gun violence”.

Let’s put it on the table.

While Minneapolis has the highest violent crime rate in Minnesota, its crime rates have been dropping over the years not because of anything the Minneapolis DFL establishment has done – they have been utterly useless, in fact – but because Minnesota is, despite being a purple-addled state, a very gun-friendly place. State law prohibits cities from having different gun laws from the rest of the state – and the rest of the state is as solidly pro-Second-Amendment as anyplace west of the Mississippi. We have good, solid carry permit law; law-abiding Minnesotans aren’t harried by excessive stupid laws…

…like people in your native, crime-ridden Chicago are, and like you want the rest of us to be.

Minneapolis, along with Saint Paul, are the parts of this state that most aggressively hassle gun law-abiding gun owners. Left to their own devices, both would happily turn into little Chicagos (in more ways than just guns). And they are the parts with the most crime.

As a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment, Sheriff Stanek talked about how the problem is one of access.

“Gun ownership isn’t a privilege, it’s a right guaranteed by the Constitution,” said Sheriff Stanek. “We have an access problem; people already prohibited by law from owning or buying a gun should never have access to firearms. We shouldn’t impose on the rights of law abiding citizens to try to solve this problem. Gun control alone will not solve the complex problem of guns and extreme violence.”

4 thoughts on “Window-Dressing”

Perhaps Sheriff Stanek put his unpleasant lesson from the Minnesota socio-political machine to good use. Good for him. I hope he’ll maintain his position on the issue.

I wish that Governor Dayton, in his quest to follow the wishes of law enforcement, would direct the Minnesota (MN) Police Officers Standards and Training (POST) board conduct a poll of ALL active, currently licensed full-time MN peace officers. The poll would address all the issues from which he feels he needs their input. Specifically the gun issues.

Dayton typically defers to the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association (MPPOA), a DFL advocacy group which claims to serve all it’s law enforcement members, but rarely seeks input from officers in small, non-metro agencies. Who are usually not interested in the DFL.

A study of the MPPOA (and their relationship with the Law Enforcement Labor Services [L.E.L.S.]) should be of interest to those who choose to give credibility to the MPPOA.

L.E.L.S. is the main labor union for law enforcement officers in MN. Those who join it are automatically enrolled in the MPPOA, regardless of their desire to do so.

“Minneapolis, along with Saint Paul, are the parts of this state that most aggressively hassle gun law-abiding gun owners.”

Two of the provisions in the passel-full of bills that are being discussed this week are worth note, in this regard.

HF0307 moves the issuance of carry permits from the county sheriffs to the municipal police chiefs.

HF0298 provides local units of government the authority to impose firearms restrictions if it “furthers a clearly stated public safety purpose”. The bill explicitly states that this includes restrictions on the issuance of transfer permits, and on the issuance of carry permits, and the exercise of carry permits.

In other words, it would grant the city councils of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth the authority not only to not issue carry permits, but to not issue transfer permits, and to not recognize carry permits that were issued by other cities or counties.

And remember: HF0237 outlaws private transfers of handguns and assault weapons – Minneapolis would have the authority to make ti impossible for any Minneapolis resident to purchase a handgun, from any source.